House Republicans Storm Secret Impeachment Hearing Today

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Republicans in the committee have stated that they can't even look at the transcripts of the witnesses, and can only do it with a DEMOCRAT staff member present.

I find that hard to believe. Source?

it denies due process to the POTUS

Where in an impeachment investigation/inquiry/ is the president afforded "due process" or the right to counsel?

and impeachment should be done through the House of Representatives, with all representatives having not only access to the transcripts of the witnesses without a chaperone

It is. When (if) the articles are drafted and submitted to the Judiciary committee for approval, the ones that are approved by the judiciary committee will be voted on by the House. Of Representatives. For submission to the Senate. For "trial."

Then the POTUS has the right to representation and cross examination.

originally posted by: Liquesence
...
PS: It's not illegal.
...

Yes it is. Impeachments should never be done in a SCIF...

AGAIN...

Let's look at the impeachment of Bill Clinton...

The impeachment of Bill Clinton was initiated on October 8, 1998, when the United States House of Representatives voted to commence impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton, 42nd president of the United States, for "high crimes and misdemeanors", which were subsequently detailed in two articles of impeachment. The specific charges against the president were lying under oath and obstruction of justice, charges that stemmed from a sexual harassment lawsuit filed against Clinton by Paula Jones. The catalyst for the president's impeachment was the Starr Report, a September 1998 report prepared by Independent Counsel Ken Starr for the House Judiciary Committee.[1]

On December 19, 1998, Clinton became the second American president to be impeached (the other being Andrew Johnson who was impeached in 1868),[a] when the House formally adopted the articles of impeachment and forwarded them to the United States Senate for adjudication. The trial in the Senate began in January 1999, with Chief Justice William Rehnquist presiding. On February 12, Clinton was acquitted on both counts as neither received the necessary two-thirds majority vote of the senators present for conviction and removal from office – in this instance 67. On Article One, 45 senators voted to convict while 55 voted for acquittal. On Article Two, 50 senators voted to convict while 50 voted for acquittal.[3] Consequently, Clinton remained in office for the balance of his second term.
...

Impeachment of Bill Clinton


Show me where was the impeachment of Clinton indited in a SCIF... It WASN'T...

Schiff, Pelosi, et al, decided to start impeachment WITHOUT A HOUSE VOTE, and instead of allowing the full House to participate in the so called "impeachment" they initiated it in a SCIF controlled by democrats and in which they don't have to give to either the public, nor most members of the House, or even the Senate, access to the actual statements made by the witnesses... Not to mention that AGAIN, Republicans, nor the lawyer of POTUS Trump can't even use their own witnesses, nor can they cross examine the democrat witnesses used in the SCIF...

originally posted by: Liquesence

I find that hard to believe. Source?

Really?... Schiff, nor Pelosi started the impeachment how it should, with a vote from the House of Representatives. Only when it passes the House can then the investigation begin by the members of the House...

...
It’s pretty simple. Democrats will summarize all of the interviews conducted relating to this unofficial Trump impeachment into one page—which can only be read with a Democratic staffer present. Schiff, whom Strassel calls “Lord High Impeacher,” is withholding documents as well. It’s all part of the larger scheme: controlling the narrative. Strassel notes how Democrats learned from their lessons regarding Trump-Russia collusion, and how the various open hearings embarrassed them and tore huge holes into the narrative because it was trash to begin with. They’re not making the same mistake twice; optics be damned .
...

WSJ Columnist Reveals The Move Adam Schiff Made That Made A GOP Congresswoman's Jaw Drop

originally posted by: Liquesence
Where in an impeachment investigation/inquiry/ is the president afforded "due process" or the right to counsel?

Even the POTUS has a right to due process, and to an open impeachment in which the information is allowed to be viewed/read by the public (during the Senate adjudication)... Bill Clinton was afforded due process, the close door impeachment through the House first, after the House voted and had the votes to start impeachment, and later by the open Senate adjudication.

originally posted by: Liquesence
It is. When (if) the articles are drafted and submitted to the Judiciary committee for approval, the ones that are approved by the judiciary committee will be voted on by the House. Of Representatives. For submission to the Senate. For "trial."

Wrong again, impeachment didn't even pass the House vote, so it is an illegal impeachment, more so when democrats, or should I say socialists, are abusing of their control of the SCIF process to control the narrative...

originally posted by: Liquesence
Then the POTUS has the right to representation and cross examination.

How are the witnesses of the democrats going to be cross-examined when it was done in a SCIF, which most of the House and Senate members don't have classified access to view the transcripts of the witnesses?...

...
Access

Access to SCIFs is normally limited to those individuals with appropriate security clearances.[3] Non-cleared personnel in SCIFs must be under the constant oversight of cleared personnel and all classified information and material removed from view in order to prevent unauthorized access.[4] As part of this process, non-cleared personnel are also typically required to surrender all recording, photographic and other electronic media devices. All of the activity and conversation inside is presumed restricted from public disclosure.
...

Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility

Not even the republicans whom barged into the SCIF were allowed to view neither the transcript, nor any supposed evidence shown by the democrats in the SCIF... Schiff himself ran out with the witness when the republicans barged in. Democrats don't want to be humiliated again as it happened during the "Russia collusion" investigation and the open hearing of Mueller whom "didn't even remember anything written by the DEMOCRATS claiming it was Mueller whom wrote it.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Schiff, nor Pelosi started the impeachment how it should, with a vote from the House of Representatives. Only when it passes the House can then the investigation begin by the members of the House...

It's an inquiry/investigation. It doesn't need a vote. When the articles are introduced and approved, you get your vote.

Wrong again, impeachment didn't even pass the House vote, so it is an illegal impeachment, more so when democrats, or should I say socialists

Wrong again. The judiciary has said the inquiry is legal (as previously linked). You know the judiciary is part of the democratic process, right? And since the articles haven't been introduced, and since it's still in the investigative, or rather discovery stage, you're wrong again.

How are the witnesses of the democrats going to be cross-examined when it was done in a SCIF, which most of the House and Senate members don't have classified access to view the transcripts of the witnesses?...

There are republicans on the investigative committees. They are privy to the testimony and information and can ask questions.

Not even the republicans whom barged into the SCIF

Yeah. They are not on the committees; therefore, they are not privy to the information and testimony until the articles are introduced. House rules, enacted by Republicans under Boehner.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Let's look at the impeachment of Bill Clinton...

Let's do.

The investigation was conducted privately, "secretly."

I don't think you understand your own source and quotes.

After the non-public Starr investigations, there was a formal and very much public impeachment proceeding based upon the findings.

when the United States House of Representatives voted to commence impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton

when the House formally adopted the articles of impeachment and forwarded them to the United States Senate for adjudication.

That is AFTER the investigation (Starr, in private, etc) when the formal charges were publicly introduced before the House for a vote.

originally posted by: Liquesence

It's an inquiry/investigation. It doesn't need a vote. When the articles are introduced and approved, you get your vote.

Yes it does need a vote by the House of representatives... Just because some MORON Liberal judge wants to claim "a vote isn't needed and the House doesn't have to start the inquiry" when this is false doesn't make that claim true... More so when Liberal judges in New York are now even denying double jeopardy to anyone linked to POTUS Trump, which is unConstitutional.

originally posted by: Liquesence
Wrong again. The judiciary has said the inquiry is legal (as previously linked). You know the judiciary is part of the democratic process, right? And since the articles haven't been introduced, and since it's still in the investigative, or rather discovery stage, you're wrong again.

instead of pulling claims out of your rear end how about you SHOW US evidence that Clinton's impeachment was done in a SCIF?...

originally posted by: Liquesence
There are republicans on the investigative committees. They are privy to the testimony and information and can ask questions.

But impeachment proceedings have to be done by THE HOUSE, not in a freaking secret meeting CONTROLLED BY DEMOCRATS...

originally posted by: Liquesence
Yeah. They are not on the committees; therefore, they are not privy to the information and testimony until the articles are introduced. House rules, enacted by Republicans under Boehner.

They are part of the Senate, and as such they should be allowed to see all evidence, including transcripts of the witnesses, and they should also be allowed to cross-examine the witnesses presented by democrats, and should be able to present their own witnesses...

Again, instead of pulling BS out of your rear end SHOW US EVIDENCE that Clinton's impeachment was done through a SCIF, and didn't start in the House...

a reply to: Liquesence

Here you go... i am not pulling BS out of my rear end like some of you are...

Updated:
Sep 25, 2019
Original:
Jun 8, 2017

Impeachment

History.com Editors

Impeachment is a process in the House of Representatives that makes up the first major step required to remove a government official from office.
...
How the Impeachment Process Works

Generally, the first step in the impeachment process in the House of Representatives is to hold a formal inquiry into whether or not there are grounds for impeachment. This can be carried out by a House committee or an independent counsel. The House of Representatives can also just hold a floor vote on articles of impeachment without any committee or panel vetting them.
...
Based on the findings of a House committee or independent panel, the House judiciary committee can then draft and approve articles of impeachment. These articles may then go to the House floor for a vote. If the articles are passed by a simple majority, the matter moves to the Senate.

The Senate then acts as courtroom, jury and judge, except in presidential impeachment trials, during which the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court acts as judge.

A two-thirds majority of the Senate is required to convict, and the penalty is usually removal from office, and sometimes disqualification from holding any future offices.
...

Impeachment


Do you see anywhere in which they state that there is no need for the House to vote, or that impeachment can be started in a SCIF?... Either the House votes, or the inquiry is started by the House.

originally posted by: Liquesence

Let's do.

The investigation was conducted privately, "secretly."

BY THE HOUSE... Not by a way of a SCIF...

originally posted by: Liquesence
I don't think you understand your own source and quotes.

I actually do understand it.. THE HOUSE has to start impeachment... In a SCIF most of the House members, nor most of the Senate members CAN'T access the information used in the SCIF. Schiff, Pelosi et al plan on only giving their own narrative and not on giving what the actual witnesses said.

originally posted by: Liquesence
After the non-public Starr investigations, there was a formal and very much public impeachment proceeding based upon the findings.

BY THE HOUSE...

originally posted by: Liquesence
That is AFTER the investigation (Starr, in private, etc) when the formal charges were publicly introduced before the House for a vote.

Started BY THE HOUSE...

a reply to: Liquesence

You can't even understand what you read...

...
Impeachment is a process in the House of Representatives that makes up the first major step required to remove a government official from office.
...

Do you read anywhere that a SCIF can be used for impeachment?... It clearly states THE FIRST STEP IS BY THE HOUSE...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

What are you blathering about? Nothing is being 'started' in a SCIF.

A SCIF is a secure conference room.

Investigations don't unfold on TV.

With Nixon and Clinton, the House had a Special Prosecutor to handle the investigation, then they held public hearings when they knew what questions to ask.

The Republicans eliminated Special Prosecutors in 2015, so now the House has to do its own investigations.

Depositions are ALWAYS held in private in ANY investigation - for a many of reasons, one of which is to ensure future witnesses don't know what has already been said. And in this specific case because there may be national security issues involved.

AND Republicans ARE involved (if they want to be) and have equal time to ask questions (if they want to take that time) in EVERY committee meeting, whether in open chambers or behind closed doors in a SCIF.

If you GOP friends are not taking advantage of their opportunity to get involved in the process, its their own dang fault, and you should take it up with them, not the Dems.

You would be much better off arguing the facts and law of the allegations than blustering over the process that 'your side' put in place in the first place.

Oh, wait. You don't have any facts or law on your side to argue. Too bad.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Liquesence

You can't even understand what you read...

...
Impeachment is a process in the House of Representatives that makes up the first major step required to remove a government official from office.
...

Do you read anywhere that a SCIF can be used for impeachment?... It clearly states THE FIRST STEP IS BY THE HOUSE...

The House of Representatives is a group of people elected to do a job - it is NOT A ROOM OR A BUILDING.

For crying out loud, the desperation is palpable.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: Extorris

So you're with a straight face saying that they will release it all, in context with no redactions. I'm saying neither party would do that.

In order to justify and succeed with an impeachment vote in the House of Reps, they should and have said they will.
Both ethically and strategically it makes sense. To not release full transcripts would cripple the impeachment they send to the Senate and affirm all of the process attacks the GOP have been launching.

SECOND
Once the impeachment is sent to the Senate for Trial with Chief Justice Roberts as Judge, they MUST release any and all evidence. It is run like a trial with appointed legal counsel examining and cross examining witness and evidence and just like a criminal court the defendant is entitled to all relevant evidence.

Since GOP have been present for each and every deposition, there is no possibility that any of the testimony could be edited or hidden.

a reply to: Extorris

It will never get to that point. This is about the election, not impeachment. This is a campaign tactic.

Maybe 50 years from now people will get to see it all in the light of day. Right now it's just both parties working the crowd.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: Extorris

It will never get to that point. This is about the election, not impeachment.

It is about both.
The Dems are not advantaged by impeaching Trump and that is why they have been so reticent.
Worst case scenario they feed the Victim Mentality that motivates much of his base.
Best case scenario they get Pence.

a reply to: rnaa

What are YOU blathering about? Can you not understand that most of the representatives in the House, or in the Senate DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO WHATEVER IS DISCUSSED IN A SCIF? The desperation is obvious from those like you whom do not want the regular process for impeachment to occur. This is the reason why Senators barged into the SCIF.

Schiff, Pelosi et al don't plan on giving any of the actual transcripts from any of their witnesses, so that Schiff can once again LIE to you as he did with the BS he created about "the POTUS conversation with the Ukrainian President." It seems obvious that as long as lies are being told about this POTUS you like being lied to...

originally posted by: rnaa


The House of Representatives is a group of people elected to do a job - it is NOT A ROOM OR A BUILDING.

For crying out loud, the desperation is palpable.

Is this Schiff junior? Where the hell did I write that The House of Representatives is a room or a building?...

A SCIF is used to investigate counter terrorism operations and other ops WHICH NEED TO BE KEPT SECRET, AND ALL INFORMATION DISCUSSED WITHIN A SCIF CAN NEVER BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC... Neither can most of the representatives in the House nor the Senate have access to information discussed in a SCIF...

It seems obvious that once and again the left is completely devoid of reading comprehension...

originally posted by: rnaa

The House of Representatives is a group of people elected to do a job - it is NOT A ROOM OR A BUILDING.

For crying out loud, the desperation is palpable.

If I thought that The House of Representatives is a room, or a building I would not have written, and I quote:

BY THE HOUSE... Not by a way of a SCIF...

I would have written:

IN THE HOUSE...

How the heck can you even discuss any topics when you seem to be completely ignorant of the syntax used in the English language?

a reply to: Extorris

For crying out loud... I have given a link and excerpts to whom has access to information in a SCIF...

Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF)

Access

Access to SCIFs is normally limited to those individuals with appropriate security clearances.[3] Non-cleared personnel in SCIFs must be under the constant oversight of cleared personnel and all classified information and material removed from view in order to prevent unauthorized access.[4] As part of this process, non-cleared personnel are also typically required to surrender all recording, photographic and other electronic media devices. All of the activity and conversation inside is presumed restricted from public disclosure.
...

en.wikipedia.org...

When Senators barged in the SCIF, because they know Schiff doesn't plan on releasing ANY of the actual transcripts from their witnesses, Schiff took the witness and left the room. Schiff doesn't want Republicans to cross-examine any of the witnesses democrats present, nor does Schiff want any other information or evidence being discussed which he doesn't want discussed.

In other words, Schiff and democrats want to control the narrative to lie to the public once again as he did with the made up BS he wrote, and read, claiming it was what POTUS Trump said to the Ukrainian President... This is why Schiff, and democrats, are using a SCIF instead of using the regular process of impeachment which allows ALL members of the House, and ALL members of the Senate, access to ALL information and ALL witnesses as well as allowing ALL members of the House, and later the Senate, to cross-examine all witnesses.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

When Senators barged in the SCIF,

Senators didn't.

(House) Representatives did.

Big difference.

Schiff doesn't want Republicans to cross-examine any of the witnesses democrats present, nor does Schiff want any other information or evidence being discussed which he doesn't want discussed. In other words, Schiff and democrats want to control the narrative to lie to the public once again as he did with the made up BS he wrote and read claiming it was what POTUS Trump said to the Ukrainian President... This is why Schiff, and democrats,

JFC. What part of the fact that there are Republicans on the three committees and in attendance during these hearings do you not comprehend?

originally posted by: Liquesence
...
JFC. What part of the fact that there are Republicans on the three committees and in attendance during these hearings do you not comprehend?

What part of "all evidence and conversations within a SCIF is presumed restricted from public disclosure" do you not comprehend? Which means Schiff won't release the actual transcripts, he will only write perhaps one page CLAIMING what was discussed in the SCIF, but we will NEVER be able to corroborate it...

What part of "ALL representatives and ALL of the Senators should have access to all info and be able to cross-examine all witnesses" do you not comprehend?...

What part of Schiff has lied to you for years, including during his made up fantasy BS which he read claiming it is what POTUS Trump discussed with the Ukrainian President, do you not comprehend?...

What part of "Schiff plans to lie once again to the public which is why he wants to do impeachment only through a SCIF" do you not comprehend?...